In Depth

The Indiana Court of Appeals April 23 affirmed a trial court's decision that a stepfather may continue to have visitation
rights with his stepdaughter even though the mother wanted his visitation rights terminated.

In Nicole A. Shaffer v. Robert J. Schaffer, No. 22A04-0709-CV-513, Nicole requested Robert's third-party stepparent visitation
rights with her daughter, M.S., be terminated because it was in her daughter's best interest to not have any more contact
with Robert. Nicole and Robert were married when she had a child by another man; Robert knew the child was not biologically
his, was listed as the father on the birth certificate, and raised the girl as his daughter. When the Shaffers divorced, Nicole
was awarded sole custody and Robert was granted visitation because of his custodial relationship with the young girl. DNA
testing when M.S. was almost 6 confirmed Charles Moon was the biological father of M.S., and Moon was awarded parenting
time as well.

Robert filed a petition to modify visitation in 2007; Nicole asked that the court terminate his visitation rights because
he is not the biological father. Nicole wanted Robert's rights terminated because she believed M.S. would be confused by spending
time at three different households, and she wanted her daughter to develop a father-daughter relationship with Moon.

Nicole believed the trial court violated her fundamental right as a parent to make decisions concerning the care, custody,
and control of her child, citing Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 66 (2000). In Troxel, the U.S. Supreme Court held a Washington
grandparent visitation statute unconstitutionally infringed on the fundamental rights of a parent and ruled it is for the
parent to decide whether a relationship between the grandparents and child would be beneficial.

However, in the instant case, the court is asked to rule on a visitation modification, not the initial visitation determination.

Judge Vaidik cites Francis v. Francis, 654 N.E.2d 4 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995), which dealt with third-party stepparent visitation
issues. In that case, Robert Francis petitioned the court to enforce his initial visitation order with two children he raised
as his own with his ex-wife, Anita, until he discovered a different man fathered both children. Anita wanted the visitation
reduced after she married the children's biological father. The trial court expanded Robert Francis' visitation because it
was in the best interest of the children, which the appellate court affirmed.

The issue in Shaffer in modifying visitation is whether the modification is in the best interest of M.S., wrote Judge Vaidik,
because the existence of a custodial and parental relationship between M.S. and Robert was already established when he was
originally awarded visitation.

Nicole needed to show why Robert's visitation rights should be terminated, but the trial court ruled she didn't introduce
any evidence to show termination would be in M.S.'s best interest. As the appellate court ruled in Francis, a parent's mere
protest that visitation with a third party would somehow harm the family isn't enough to deny visitation in all cases, especially
when the third party cared for the children as his own, wrote Judge Vaidik.

Conversations

0 Comments

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or
hateful.

You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.

Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content
are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.

No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are
relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.

We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag
a post simply because you disagree with it.